Texas AD Chris Del Conte

[ImissWallyPryor 9046]

17 minutes ago, Blotto said:

Sorry thats bullshit. We dont need more students nor are we struggling for applicants. We have been at 50K students since I attended in the 90's. Applications are growing rapidly at Texas even with shitty football. The reason? Because we offer a top notch education at state school prices. Until that stops being the case, we don't need the football team to recruit for us. 

If we start making the CFP, you will see an uptick in applications. It won’t be like night and day, but there will be an increase. With that uptick, UT will be a bit more selective, and every year a hundreds of students will choose UT who might not have otherwise. I never claimed it would be dramatic shift, but it would definitely happen.

I’ve seen people choose UT and Austin in a tiebreaker for grad school and work based on football. My wife had a roommate in college who went to Notre Dame for his engineering undergrad, and he said he picked UT over other options because he wanted to continue at a big time football school. I worked with a tOSU grad who said he picked Austin for a job transfer for the same reason. 

Edited December 17, 2020 by ImissWallyPryor

[TwiceHorn 31520]

5 minutes ago, Blotto said:

Sorry thats bullshit. We dont need more students nor are we struggling for applicants. We have been at 50K students since I attended in the 90's. Applications are growing rapidly at Texas even with shitty football. The reason? Because we offer a top notch education at state school prices. Until that stops being the case, we don't need the football team to recruit for us. 

And I strongly suspect that Top X% admission mostly weeds out those who care enough about sports generally to make a decision based on it.

Back in the day of X on the SAT, Y on the ACT, or top quarter or whatever, sure there were a shit ton appying and accepting on that basis.

There are probably still a bunch of applicants on that basis, but their admission is a longshot.

[dcar00 14324]

12 minutes ago, Blotto said:

OK. But who knows what the fuck is up with Urban. The dude is a great coach but a head case and if he doesnt want to coach here, you cant force him. The shit you read online is largely speculation. So if not Urban, who do you hire? Stoops had no head coaching experience. Dabo was a nobody. Tressel came from Div II or some shit. Carrol was like USC's 4th option. To pretend like getting the coaching search right is easy to do is ridiculous. We may not like it, but every school short of Ohio State has plenty of shitty hires. It has nothing to do with us striving to be like Cal. Its a fucking crapshoot. Mix in a fuckstick like Steve Patterson, and there ya go. 

Its not easy.  I'm trying to limit the variables.  our G5 guys brought their G5 staff.  I'd like for that to not happen again, please.  Dabo didn't do that and no one expects Clemson to "win" so they took a shot.  The variables will be less likely with a guy from P5 who has had some success at that level as a head coach and has real relationships to put together a high level team of assistants and manage them.

I want Urban as there are zero variables other than health.  I've said Franklin and Mullen fit the bill to reduce the variables but people shit on them and then offer up the Clemson OC.  He might be fine if we had a DKR to talk with him and find out what his plan for assistants is.  Charlie just failed.  He did bring in the supposed stud OL coach from OSU(who ended up being meh) everything else was comfort/shit.  Herman thought he could just mensa/TexasTakeover this shit himself with his G5 band of fuckups.  yeah about that.

The most important thing is your assistants when you take on a job like this.  Charlie and Herman failed miserably there, it was predictable, and here we are.

[BrazilHorn 6628]

26 minutes ago, ImissWallyPryor said:

I +repped your post, but it’s going a bit far to say that since UT has had many of the same problems, we are no better or worse and any other program. I doubt UF and tOSU are the worst of the worst, either, although I’d bet we’re still a bit better than them. Big time programs are more heavily scrutinized, so once something gets out, everyone hears about it. 

That is roughly the point I am trying to make. It is more a matter that people are trying to act like UT has always been a bastion of sainthood in terms of athletes. I am not saying UT has ever had the systemic issues like LSU or Baylor in regards to rape or PSU in regards to covering up for a pedophile. However UT has had plenty of players driving drunk, getting into fights, breaking into houses, assaulting people, using drugs etc. I would argue that broader issue is the top tier athlete has been coddled and covered up for all of HS & so going into college feels like they can get away with anything. UT's athletes really are no better or worse than any one else's from a behavioral perspective.

[Blotto 23564]

1 hour ago, ImissWallyPryor said:

If we start making the CFP, you will see an uptick in applications. It won’t be like night and day, but there will be an increase. With that uptick, UT will be a bit more selective, and every year a hundreds of students will choose UT who might not have otherwise. I never claimed it would be dramatic shift, but it would definitely happen.

Read the article I posted earlier. 

Quote

From 2013 to 2017, applications to UT Austin rose from 38,000 to 51,000.

It doesn't matter what the football team is doing, students recognize the relative value of a UT education. Sure maybe a few here and there make the decision to go to Harvard (or Bama, lulz) becuase we haven't won enough on the football field, but the number of those are so few its insignificant in the discussion. 

Edited December 17, 2020 by Blotto

[dcar00 14324]

Just now, Blotto said:

Read the article I posted earlier. 

It doesnt matter what the football team is doing, students recognize the relative value of a UT education. Sure maybe a few here and there make the decision to go to Harvard (or Bama, lulz) becuase we havent enough on the football field, but the number of those are so few its insignificant in the discussion. 

for the love of god, my eyes!  please do not post our 2014 to 2016 record on this site anymore.

[Horn of Gabriel 1667]

5 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

The most important thing is your assistants when you take on a job like this.  Charlie and Herman failed miserably there, it was predictable, and here we are.

We have plenty of evidence that this is true, asst and position coaches matter in player development and we've sorely lacked here.  The counter-argument is that coaches tend to dance with who brung 'em, and they value known quantities, working well together, and everyone working within a common system and defined roles - all of which they reasonably had at the stop before they came to Texas otherwise they wouldn't be considered.  That's why I always find it amusing that we as fans grouse about how Herman should really "open the checkbook" and "hire XYZ OC/DC" because they are "the best."  First of all, while money speaks, what is the motivation for a top tier OC/DC to join a head coach they've never worked with before?  What if you're not compatible, what if the HC wants to overrule your calls on the headset on gameday even though he promised not to do that and can't give up his OC tendancies?  If I'm a top flight OC and you offer to pay me 150% of what I'm making right now that's awesome, but 150% of my salary now for 2 years when my new HC gets fired and takes me down with him might not look as good as 4 years @100% of what I make now and the chance to jump to a HC position of my own, or move up to a higher tier program as OC with a HC I know and have a relationship with.

We have this arrogance as Texas that we can money whip anyone and that's all that matters: it's not.  Job security, working relationships, chances of success, administrative support and culture, and a lot of other factors are also in play.

[dcar00 14324]

1 minute ago, Horn of Gabriel said:

We have plenty of evidence that this is true, asst and position coaches matter in player development and we've sorely lacked here.  The counter-argument is that coaches tend to dance with who brung 'em, and they value known quantities, working well together, and everyone working within a common system and defined roles - all of which they reasonably had at the stop before they came to Texas otherwise they wouldn't be considered.  That's why I always find it amusing that we as fans grouse about how Herman should really "open the checkbook" and "hire XYZ OC/DC" because they are "the best."  First of all, while money speaks, what is the motivation for a top tier OC/DC to join a head coach they've never worked with before?  What if you're not compatible, what if the HC wants to overrule your calls on the headset on gameday even though he promised not to do that and can't give up his OC tendancies?  If I'm a top flight OC and you offer to pay me 150% of what I'm making right now that's awesome, but 150% of my salary now for 2 years when my new HC gets fired and takes me down with him might not look as good as 4 years @100% of what I make now and the chance to jump to a HC position of my own, or move up to a higher tier program as OC with a HC I know and have a relationship with.

We have this arrogance as Texas that we can money whip anyone and that's all that matters: it's not.  Job security, working relationships, chances of success, administrative support and culture, and a lot of other factors are also in play.

Mack brought Mad dog and Davis from UNC and that was it.  When DKR asked Mack who he had in mind for assistants, Brown had a list already made. He updated constantly and he wanted guys that had some head coaching experience.  He also was a master at creating relationships with other coaches(sure some like spurrier thought it was bullshit but a lot didn't).  Its only my opinion but my guess is Herman is the opposite of that and Charlie somehwere in the middle.

[dcar00 14324]

7 minutes ago, Horn of Gabriel said:

 

We have this arrogance as Texas that we can money whip anyone and that's all that matters: it's not.  Job security, working relationships, chances of success, administrative support and culture, and a lot of other factors are also in play.

so you are looking for "perfect, perfect" I see...

Edited December 17, 2020 by dcar00

[Horn of Gabriel 1667]

2 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

Mack brought Mad dog and Davis from UNC and that was it.  When DKR asked Mack who he had in mind for assistants, Brown had a list already made. He updated constantly and he wanted guys that had some head coaching experience.  He also was a master at creating relationships with other coaches(sure some like spurrier thought it was bullshit but a lot didn't).  Its only my opinion but my guess is Herman is the opposite of that and Charlie somehwere in the middle.

I'll give Mack credit for that.  Saban also rotates Asst coaches in frequently.  There's a bit of a catch-22; to get fresh talent who wants to work with you at the highest level you have to be successful and build trust, but to built trust and be successful you probably need access to new talent and fresh ideas.  Starting that flywheel is tough, which is probably why so many coaches stick with their core group.  Hell if you believe the rumors about Urban he's looking to go back to the talent he's used in the past, not raid 7 different programs for asst. coaches...

[dcar00 14324]

1 minute ago, Horn of Gabriel said:

I'll give Mack credit for that.  Saban also rotates Asst coaches in frequently.  There's a bit of a catch-22; to get fresh talent who wants to work with you at the highest level you have to be successful and build trust, but to built trust and be successful you probably need access to new talent and fresh ideas.  Starting that flywheel is tough, which is probably why so many coaches stick with their core group.  Hell if you believe the rumors about Urban he's looking to go back to the talent he's used in the past, not raid 7 different programs for asst. coaches...

I believe the rumors but it is probably 3-4 guys but even if it is more, those are guys at P5 level that have won championships.  big difference between that and Charlie/Tom and even Mack(he was coming from UNC, with ahem, zero championships not tOSU and Fla with CC's and NC's).  Mack brought 2.  strength(the player hammer) and his OC(Davis didn't max out but he was way better than the bullshit charlie and tom brought/hired).

[dcar00 14324]

sorry for the derail.  CDC better make sure the new guy has a plan for top level assistants.  

[DaysOff 7967]

It's time the self-centered and ethically challenged alumni quit holding holding the university back. If we have to hire a human piece of shit as head coach to win games, it's time to shut down the football program.
 
“It’s the big cigar guys with big dollars who are willing to spend it, because it suits them and because they can,” Turner said of donors. “Universities get held hostage over that, and it just takes courage on the part of presidents and other leaders in higher ed to say that’s inappropriate.”
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/2020/12/17/college-football-coach-firing-costs-rise-much-75-million/3930808001/

How did this guy beat out Dennison for the most annoying poster? Practice, Practice, practice.

[BurntOrange&White 39956]

I see Dipshit Duke is going full autismode

 

 

[PilotsError 2314]

RD is just now discovering how college athletics work. 

[burdine 522]

1 hour ago, dcar00 said:

Its not easy.  I'm trying to limit the variables.  our G5 guys brought their G5 staff.  I'd like for that to not happen again, please.  Dabo didn't do that and no one expects Clemson to "win" so they took a shot.  The variables will be less likely with a guy from P5 who has had some success at that level as a head coach and has real relationships to put together a high level team of assistants and manage them.

Agree this would be a good approach in theory.  In practice, it produces a very short list.  Who fits this criteria?  

Mullen, yes

Franklin, 37-23 in the B1G at Penn State, going to say sort of

Campbell, 26-19 in the Big12 at ISU, given ISU's situation he's done a good job most folks think

Fitzgerald, 63-60 in 14 years in the B1G at Northwestern, similar to Campbell doing a good job with less

 

Who else fits this criteria that we should consider?

 

 

[ImissWallyPryor 9046]

1 hour ago, Blotto said:

Read the article I posted earlier. 

It doesn't matter what the football team is doing, students recognize the relative value of a UT education. Sure maybe a few here and there make the decision to go to Harvard (or Bama, lulz) becuase we haven't won enough on the football field, but the number of those are so few its insignificant in the discussion. 

It seems like we’re splitting hairs (something that never happens in Surlyland, I know). You say it’s insignificant. I’m not claiming it’s exactly significant, but it’s not something to be dismissed if a few hundred more top 5%er types choose UT. I’m not deluded enough to think that we’ll have hoards of top 1% students knocking down the doors and turning down full scholarships just for the DKRTMS experience.

[bullzak 422]

I look at football as part of the marketing arm of the university. Its a chance to show tangible excellence on a broad scale. 

What we have shown over the last decade in football is mediocrity. It takes some shine off other endeavors. 

If the BMD are willing to try to fix that I just dont get the problem. A lot of these same people donate a ton to the university outside of football. They want excellence across the board. Dont see what is wrong with that. 

[Blotto 23564]

1 hour ago, ImissWallyPryor said:

It seems like we’re splitting hairs (something that never happens in Surlyland, I know). You say it’s insignificant. I’m not claiming it’s exactly significant, but it’s not something to be dismissed if a few hundred more top 5%er types choose UT. I’m not deluded enough to think that we’ll have hoards of top 1% students knocking down the doors and turning down full scholarships just for the DKRTMS experience.

Fair enough, my original reply was really geared towards the comment that being bad at football hurts the entire University. I see no evidence of that. Our football team hasnt been winning in 10 years and since that time, general UT fundraising has been very strong, UT athletic department revenue continues to grow, and applications to UT have boomed causing us to be more selective. Football success is certainly "nice to have", but hardly critical for the success of UT. We had ample success on the football field from 2000-2009 and no success from 2010- current. Show me how UT has suffered other than our mental psyche from watching the shit put on the field. 

[NeverMarryAStripper 21920]

Being bad at football probably helps fundraising for the academic side.  Most of the BMDs give money to both athletics and academics.  If we're bad enough at football to make them quit giving to athletics they probably will give more to academics.  Maybe that's the long game for the BOR.

[runthebone 8027]

Tick tock.

[Loather 127]

We have a decent OC, a good DC, an elite tailback, and probably the 1st or 2nd best talent in the Big 12. 

None of that will matter. The head coach is incompetent. The team will fail next year. They will humiliate themselves again.

At some point there will be no going back for this program.

There will be no Urban Meyers available next year, and we don't need UM, we just need a competent coach. 

It is CDC's job to find that coach.

 

Jay Hartzell $1,250,000 Per Year

Chris Del Conte $2,500,000 Per Year

Tom Herman's Staff $7,250,000 Per Year

Tom Herman $6,000,000 Per Year

 

These guys are getting rich while they embarrass the University of Texas. 

 

 

[David Dennison 18944]

They might be embarrassing you, but they aren't embarrassing the University of Texas. The university is much, much more than the football team.

[JFKFC 4891]

1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

They might be embarrassing you, but they aren't embarrassing the University of Texas. The university is much, much more than the football team.

[BrazilHorn 6628]

Until Herman is fired fuck CDC. 
 

[Loather 127]

11 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

They might be embarrassing you, but they aren't embarrassing the University of Texas. The university is much, much more than the football team.

I agree the school is more than a football team. And really, even having a terrible football team would be nothing to be ashamed of. What is embarrassing is having a dysfunctional team of quitters and underachievers, and a level of coaching ineptitude that brings scorn and literal laughter from around the country. I don't take it personally, but it should embarrass anyone associated with the football program. And maybe it shouldn't reflect on the school as a whole but i think it has.

 

.

[ImissWallyPryor 9046]

41 minutes ago, Loather said:

I agree the school is more than a football team.

 

[Horn80 6131]

1 hour ago, Loather said:

We have a decent OC, a good DC, an elite tailback, and probably the 1st or 2nd best talent in the Big 12. 

None of that will matter. The head coach is incompetent. The team will fail next year. They will humiliate themselves again.

At some point there will be no going back for this program.

There will be no Urban Meyers available next year, and we don't need UM, we just need a competent coach. 

It is CDC's job to find that coach.

 

Jay Hartzell $1,250,000 Per Year

Chris Del Conte $2,500,000 Per Year

Tom Herman's Staff $7,250,000 Per Year

Tom Herman $6,000,000 Per Year

 

These guys are getting rich while they embarrass the University of Texas. 

 

 

WTF?  6 million per year for a mediocre win loss record over 4 years with zero conference championships.  

[David Dennison 18944]

17 hours ago, Loather said:

I agree the school is more than a football team. And really, even having a terrible football team would be nothing to be ashamed of. What is embarrassing is having a dysfunctional team of quitters and underachievers, and a level of coaching ineptitude that brings scorn and literal laughter from around the country. I don't take it personally, but it should embarrass anyone associated with the football program. And maybe it shouldn't reflect on the school as a whole but i think it has.

Does it reflect on Berkeley? Michigan? Stanford?

Do you think less of those schools as academic institutions because their football team sucks?

Of course not.

[orangecat92 306]

Any sightings last night? 

[BurntOrange&White 39956]

 

This was interesting but we all know it.

[satyanash 14599]

[Rockethorn1978 6102]

Hey cdc, we didn't bring you here to hire some 5th option. We had that with a interim AD. What a disaster. Someone told me 2021 was gonna be better than 2020, It's starting off like complete dog shit.

How many guys said no before we settled on Sark? I will say at least 3.

[satyanash 14599]

 

[936horn 917]

Fuck off CDC you piece of shit

[CUM2TX 11]

hey cdc. can you at the very least not give this new guy a fucken raise or extension unless he actually wins the shit ass big12?

[Guest Lobo]

Wow, Chris.  You play weeks of mindgames to finally shitcan Tom...still cost us tens of millions of dollars and somehow secure the program's 6th most attractive option?  Wow...you are playing Trump-level chess.  You fucking child.  

[Errestaurants 2570]

4 minutes ago, Lobo said:

Wow, Chris.  You play weeks of mindgames to finally shitcan Tom...still cost us tens of millions of dollars and somehow secure the program's 6th most attractive option?  Wow...you are playing Trump-level chess.  You fucking child.  

David Pollack is saying Sark has turned us down. Lol

[JFKFC 4891]

CDC is a failure. Fuck him. 

[MrPhlegm 3413]

CDC is a failure. Fuck him. 

kinky

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301]

What a fucking garbage hire. CDC, like everything else at Texas, is a complete fraud. He’ll make a fortune sucking shit through a straw in Austin. Same as it ever was.

[TwiceHorn 31520]

4 minutes ago, longhornmatt said:

I can’t believe we gave CDC a big extension.   Spending tens of millions only to hire Sarkisian is unbelievable.   Plus, hiring a guy who actually got fired from USC for coaching drunk is basically terminable on its own.   Why would any AD take that kind of risk?  

Seriously, CDC, do you not realize this is the kind of hire that gets you fired if it’s not a home run?   Just for your own self preservation, there are plenty of guys you could hire that wouldn’t get your own ass fired if they don’t work out.  Moron.

I usually love your takes, but I can't agree with this one.  After Meyer, no one was a sure-fire get or a sure-fire winner.

The choices were to keep Herman or hire some type of scrub.  If it turns out that Sarkisian is that "scrub," I think I like the thought better than say Mullen or Kelly.

Plus, I have been told repeatedly on this thread that CDC doesn't run this shit, it's Hartzell, or Eltife, or some cabal of BMD.  If CDC or Crystal Conte or whatever hired Steve Sarkisian, you know damn well he did it with the advise and consent of the parties that can have him fired, if not at their express command.  It wasn't some kind of solo act.

[TwiceHorn 31520]

4 minutes ago, longhornmatt said:

That’s all well and good until it doesn’t work out and those people who gave their advice and consent need a fall guy to blame when people inevitably start skewering them for hiring Dennis Hopper from Hoosiers.

So, you'd rather CDC override the others to make a "safe" hire?

He is probably fucked either way.  Although Dodds never paid the piper for his multitudes of shit hires.  Even Patterson wasn't fired because of his shit hires.

[kevwun 15840]

I would not have bet my job on Sark.  Odds are we are looking for a new football coach and AD in a few years.

[TwiceHorn 31520]

29 minutes ago, kevwun said:

I would not have bet my job on Sark.  Odds are we are looking for a new football coach and AD in a few years.

Anyone he hires he effectively bets his job on.  If he or they make a "safe" hire that doesn't pan out, people would be screaming that he's a nutless cunt.

It's a lose-lose job.

Edited January 2, 2021 by TwiceHorn

[kevwun 15840]

Right and knowing that, I wouldn't have bet my future on Sark being the guy.

[bschoolprof 6271]

I've been as critical as anyone of CDC, but Herman's firing today pretty clearly demonstrates CDC was not really involved in that decision or the replacement decision.  So if you are pissed about Sark (if we do end up with Sark), then don't blame CDC.  He's just the suit out front.  

[TwiceHorn 31520]

2 minutes ago, bschoolprof said:

I've been as critical as anyone of CDC, but Herman's firing today pretty clearly demonstrates CDC was not really involved in that decision or the replacement decision.  So if you are pissed about Sark (if we do end up with Sark), then don't blame CDC.  He's just the suit out front.  

How so?

I disbelieve any of the extreme positions, e.g. that Del Conte is out of the loop or is solely controlling things.  I assume that it's the same as it ever was, by committee.

[Scooter Monzingo 821]

I guess I thought that if Sark should ever got another big time job, it would be a Vandy or Possibly Missouri level job. Never did I think it would be Texas. I’m at a loss for words. If he fails it will be ugly as fuck.

[Horn of Gabriel 1667]

This thread is hilarious: "CDC is just along for the ride, he's a suit who controls nothing."  Next post: "OMG CDC should be fired for making such a weak hire!"